Politics

Trump Freezes EPA Grants to Liberal Pet Projects

from – Polizette – by Edmund Kozak

Officials at the Environmental Protection Agency have reportedly been instructed to freeze all of the agency’s contracts and grant programs until officials in the new administration can conduct a top-to-bottom review.

“Right now we are in a holding pattern. The new EPA administration has asked that all contract and grant awards be temporarily suspended, effective immediately. Until we receive further clarification, this includes task orders and work assignments,” an internal email originally obtained by Pro Publica said.

“The EPA awards more than $4 billion in funding for government grants and contracts each year,” Fox News reported on Tuesday.

A brief look at how some of that money was being spent under the Obama administration paints a clear picture as to why the new administration may be looking at an overhaul:

In some cases, the Obama EPA has offered textbook case studies in how to waste taxpayer money on ideologically motivated projects.

In 2014 the University of California, Riverside received $15,000 to create technology to reduce carbon emissions from those infamous scourges of the environment: barbecues. That same year, researchers at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University were given $15,000 of taxpayers’ money to build a pond on a roof, complete with a floating island.

Also in 2014, the EPA awarded $15,000 to the University of Tulsa to create a system that monitored how much water hotel guests used while showering. The proposal made the rather Orwellian promise that the “technology will … assist hotel guests in modifying their behavior.”

As creepy and ideologically motivated as that grant may have been, at the very least it attempted to address domestic water waste. The agency gave $1.5 million to the University of Colorado and the National Center for Atmospheric Research to study pollution caused by residential cooking — in Africa.

In 2013, the EPA gave $84,000 to a researcher at the University of Michigan to study the effectiveness of using churches to promote environmental causes.

“Climate change — which affects traditional faith-based efforts to improve human health, mitigate poverty and redress social inequity — is inspiring religious organizations to advocate for clean air and water, restore ecosystems, and conserve resources,” the grant stated. “This project seeks to understand the empirical experiences of faith-based environmental efforts within communities.”

The EPA seems to really like the idea of using churches as political propaganda centers. In 2015, the Washington Free Beacon reported that the EPA gave a $30,000 “environmental justice grant” to a Unitarian church that has preached against “white privilege” and called America “structurally racist.”

While not spending money in foreign countries and encouraging pastors to promote radical environmentalism, the EPA also seems to have spent considerable funds trying to answer questions to which the collective wisdom of the human experience already knows the answer.

In 2014, the EPA gave a post-grad student at the University of Oregon $84,000 to study the link between plants and people, and whether or not living in densely populated urban areas with little to no vegetation is unhealthy (it is).

While it is not yet known if current contracts will also be affected by the grant freeze, militant environmentalists across the country are undoubtedly pulling out their hair in fury at the news that no longer will the EPA spend money on liberal pet projects. Responsible Americans who wish their tax money be spent prudently, however, are likely to support the freeze.

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter
and Download the AMAC News App

Sign Up Today Download

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Sign Up Today
Subscribe
Notify of
6 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jarhead
4 years ago

Urgent need to eliminate the “so-called” bonuses given to VA employees……many of whom should be in prison.

James H. Rust
4 years ago

I don’t now if a single person can comprehend the extent of EPA’s efforts to ruin the country. They have an internet site that lists the $58 billion given out the past 10 years as grants and contract. A lot of money is given to Indian tribes. As I remember, a $17 million grant was given to the Sioux Indian tribe that is demonstrating against the Dakota Access Pipeline. A further grant of $50 million was given to the Tribal Council of that tribe. This makes me wonder if EPA asked the Tribe to demonstrate and stop construction of the pipeline. This supports President Obama’s effort to stop production of fossil fuels

PaulE
4 years ago
Reply to  James H. Rust

Your answered your own question James. Of course the money was given with the understanding that the tribe would put one a good demonstration to protest the pipeline. The tribe in question didn’t even see a need to attend any of the meetings with other tribes and the pipeline company when the pipeline was originally proposed. Only after the EPA funds started flowing did they suddenly decide they needed to protest. As we both know, that is not coincidense.

PaulE
4 years ago

So far, President Trump is doing just great! He is actually keeping his campaign promises. Which is almost unheard of when it comes to the two previous Republican Presidents of the last 25 years. They just gave passing lip service to what they would do, but then largely forgot their promises once in office. Sure the Democrat Presidents of the same time frame actually implemented much of their campaign promises, but those policies were almost all to the detriment America’s economy, national security and society as a whole. So from the perspective of implementing positive, pro-growth, pro national security and pro American society as a whole, whether the idiots on the left realize it or not, Trump is doing great so far. That President Trump’s actions are infuriating the lunatics and left-leaning fanatics on the left, that is just an added bonus as far as I am concerned. Think of it as free entertainment broadcast nightly by the mainstream media that is besides themselves over their side no longer residing in the White House.

HAM
4 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

There is probably a need for SOME environmental oversight but these idiots are out of control. Every Democrat administration in 20 years or so have allowed these lunatics more & more freedom to do as they please with no oversight and they have gone crazy. There is very few, if any, conservatives employed by the EPA (I’m sure that was deliberate) and it has become more and politicized. The is no room for politics in any Federal agency. I am so glad Trump has made this one of his priorities. Although there didn’t appear to be as much activity during Republican administrations, I don’t think anything was done to decrease its size. Congress needs to make a law to require any future regulations out of this agency have to be reviewed first to prevent future Democrat administrations from giving them free reign ever again!

PaulE
4 years ago
Reply to  HAM

Not only reviewed, but also approved by requiring a majority vote in both houses of Congress. That would raise the level of public visibility of what the EPA is trying to do with their various regulations. That way the American people would have at least a better opportunity, if they decided to pay attention, to understand not only what the intended regulation is supposed to accomplish but also what the cost not only to taxpayers, but those impacted by the proposed regulation. Far too much of what the EPA does is done behind closed doors and without any real legislative over-sight. That has to end.

6
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x